Hindsight 20/20: Looking Back for a Vision Forward in Gerontology

This article contains excerpts from the opening and closing remarks delivered at CAG2021 – the Annual Scientific and Educational Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology (CAG) – which was hosted virtually from October 21 to 23, 2021. This event commemorated CAG’s 50th anniversary and included 645 delegates from across Canada and the world. The conference theme, “Hindsight 20/20: Looking Back for a Vision Forward in Gerontology,” focused on the burgeoning gerontological work that examines the various and complex ways that COVID-19 has affected older people and aging, as well as the need to develop a stronger emphasis on justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in the field of gerontology.

E-Learning in Times Of COVID-19: Insights into Management and Communication Students’ Perspectives Throughout the Global Coronavirus Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought not only a global health crisis, but also many changes and shifts towards a more digitalized working environment. In line with the GlobalET conference theme of this year, this paper looks at how particularly the education sectors has been affected by these new forms of working. One year after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic the Competence Team for the Digitalization of Communication at the FHWien der WKW – University of Applied Sciences for Management and Communication conducted two comparative online surveys with students as well as 60 in-depth interviews. The results of this research help to identify and improve ongoing Distance Learning practices, starting with logistics such as the preferred study mode, recommended duration of the Distance Learning units or mandatory attendance of students during class. The outcome of the research will further contribute to sharpen the clarity of the purpose of digital activities to understand the required support services or online material and to develop possibilities to track students’ study progress. Even though there is an understanding that more than one year after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic the findings can only represent the current status and cannot give a long-term outlook, they might be useful to further develop students’ needs for future Distance Learning and its practices.

2021 Online Conference

The online conference does not and cannot replicate the flow and feel of a face-to-face experience; instead, it offers something new.We saw the timing and the mode of the conference as a chance to ask hard questions about the ground that persona studies has carved as an emerging field of study. We wanted to ensure that persona studies is a space for new voices and new directions of inquiry, and to provide a conference space that is entirely built around inclusive scholarship.The purpose of framing the conference as diversifying persona studies was to expand the scope and reach of our ambition, invite new possibilities, to challenge the conceptualisations of the field, and to challenge ourselves to release a sense of ownership and control over what persona studies could be. We have always strived to make persona studies as a welcoming and inclusive scholarly exercise, but the risk of groupthink and boundary policing is ever-present, and the conference theme was intended to challenge this.

Preface

The 2021 EUROCALL conference was held in Paris on 26-27 August 2021 as a fully online event hosted by Cnam Paris. It was preceded by an online project event, the CATAPULT Symposium on 25 August 2021 hosted by Sorbonne Université. The conference theme was CALL and Professionalisation...

Peer Review Declaration Form Guidance

On the following page you will find the declaration form. • Please answer each question. • You should submit the form along with the rest of your submission files. • The deadline is the submission date written in your publishing agreement. All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. We will published the information you provide as part of your proceedings. Peer review declaration All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other (please describe) Each submission is anonymously reviewed by an average of three independent reviewers, to ensure the final high standard and quality of each accepted submission. • Conference submission management system: Online submission • Number of submissions received: 75 papers • Number of submissions sent for review: 75 papers • Number of submissions accepted: 52 papers • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 69% • Average number of reviews per paper: 3 reviews per paper • Total number of reviewers involved: 40 reviewers • Any additional info on review process: We developed the strict peer review procedures and invite relevant experts to serve as editors in order to control the quality of the papers. First, all articles will be subjected to peer review administered by editors. Then, reviews will be conducted by expert referees, who have been requested to provide unbiased and constructive comments aimed, whenever possible, at improving the work. Final, editors will take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the materials they publish and their decision to accept or reject a paper for publication will be based only on the merits of the work and the relevance to the conference theme. The following criteria will be considered by the editors and referees in their evaluation: (1) Is the subject matter within the scope of the conference? (2) Does the paper contain enough original results to warrant publication? (3) Is the paper technically sound and free of errors? (4) Is the work clearly and concisely presented? Is it well organized? (5) Does the title clearly and sufficiently reflect its con tents? (6) Is the abstract informative? Are the main results and conclusions mentioned? (7) Are the illustrations of adequate quality, relevant and understandable? (8) Does the bibliography give a clear view of the current state-of-the-art in the domain? (9) Is the quality of the language satisfactory? • Contact person for queries: Name : Guosong Jiang Affiliation: Huanggang Normal University Email : [email protected]

Effects of Loneliness and Social Isolation on Cognitive Health: Latest Perspectives and Future Directions

Loneliness and social isolation as antecedents of cognitive decline have received substantial attention in recent research. This symposium addresses this year’s conference theme of aging in the “new normal”. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the negative impacts of loneliness and social isolation on older adults’ health and wellbeing. This symposium includes studies that shed light on the relationships between loneliness, social isolation and cognitive health using a multidisciplinary approach, and provide recommendations and future directions for advancing this research area. The first presentation examines cardiovascular biomarkers as potential mechanisms that mediate the longitudinal relationship between loneliness and cognitive decline with the HRS dataset. The second presentation examines several social isolation indicators and their effects on cognitive decline in a Canadian longitudinal study. Using the US ADRC longitudinal study of aging, the third study shows the effect of loneliness on cognitive health in older adults pre- and post-onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The symposium concludes with a literature review of the different measures employed to operationalize the constructs of loneliness, isolation, which resulted in heterogeneous study findings on their influences on the risk of developing dementia. This review calls for consistent measures to produce comparable evidence on the health consequences of loneliness and isolation. In all, this symposium reports and reviews the latest evidence on the association between social isolation, loneliness and cognitive health amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. It also echoes the conference theme of transforming disruption to opportunities in aging health service and research.

Preface

The global health crisis has occurred since the Covid-19 outbreak shocked the world for about 1.5 years. Partial and complete lockdown practiced in some countries and/or areas within a country are consequences that limit most of our regular activities. In particular to livestock-related fields, this pandemic also creates new challenges in many aspects such as food supply chain, feed availability, workers hygiene in the processing plant and foodservice, etc. At the same time, the supply of livestock and animal-based food must still be supplied every day, whatever will be. As part of our academic duty, it is our responsibility also to provide preference strategies in facing many challenges on animal production and agroecotechnology as fit with our conference theme this year. ICAPFS is the right place for us to share the latest research, viewpoints, progress, critical issues, programs, and policies to provide practical options to respond to such challenges. The conference is the second time we present ICAPFS after the achievement of 1st ICAPFS in 2018. Unlike what we conducted four years ago, the forum is transformed offline to an online presence today. Since the covid-19 pandemic spread out to almost all world countries started last 2019, many things changed our daily activities. Somehow, the acceleration of digital technology cannot limit our academic efforts to spread the latest progress in animal science. List of Conference committee are available in this pdf.

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-anonymous, i.e., authors’ identities are known to the reviewers, reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors. • Criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. The papers were reviewed based on their relevance to the conference theme, originality, organization, clarity, quality of figures and tables, language and conformity to author’s guidelines. If the overall recommendation was acceptance with either minor or major changes, the authors were able to submit a revised version addressing the comments raised in the review process. • Conference submission management system: Emma events management system. • Number of submissions received: 141 • Number of submissions sent for review: 141 • Number of submissions accepted: 130 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received X 100): 92.2% • Average number of reviews per paper: 1 • Total number of reviewers involved: 25 • Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): The papers were reviewed by members of the local organizing committee and international scientific committee • Contact person for queries: Prof. Pedro J. Coelho ([email protected])

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other In our conference, we do a single-blind peer review where the author does not know who the reviewers are. Submitting papers, editor decisions, review processes were conducted through our system http://ice-elinvo.uny.ac.id/. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards. • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? Six criteria must be met by the papers that are included in the ICE-ELINVO 2021 international conference. All reviewers must refer to these six criteria. 1. Is the paper relevant to the conference theme? 2. Does it contribute to the theoretical or practical domains? 3. Does it state the problem statement? 4. Does it comprise an appropriate research methodology or proposed method? 5. Does it describe indicative results? 6. Does it fulfill the requirements of the paper template? Each criterion has a value from the range 1-4. The reviewer will evaluate each criterion, and then the system will add up all the scores for each criterion. The maximum total value is 24. The next stage is that the reviewer will send back the paper reviewed to the author through the system. Finally, authors are given two weeks to correct and resubmit. • Conference submission management system: http://ice-elinvo.uny.ac.id (our University has our own management system for reviewing articles) • Number of submissions received: 84 Papers • Number of submissions sent for review: 68 Papers • Number of submissions accepted: 56 Papers • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 66.67 • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 48 • Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): Each manuscript submitted to the ICE-ELINVO 2021 international conference was checked for plagiarism using Turnitin. • Contact person for queries: Muhammad Luthfi Hakim, Department of Electrical Engineering Education, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Email: [email protected]

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series has been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double-blind • Conference submission management system: 1. Sending materials to the organizers of the conference; 2. Verification of compliance with the subject of the conference; 3. Checking materials for plagiarism using two systems; 4. Submitting for double blind review; 5. Checking the quality of translation of the article into English; 6. Checking for the correct design of materials; 7. Submission of materials to the Publisher. • Number of submissions received: 558 • Number of submissions sent for review: 505 • Number of submissions accepted: 252 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 50% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 118 • Any additional info on review process: To be accepted for publication, the material must have the following requirements: compliance with the conference theme; positive expertise of reviewers; good level of English and well-formed material. The article should have: - the relevance (subject matter of the article should be interest to the scientific community in terms of the current development of science and technology); - the scientific character (the article should deal with considered the scientific aspects of the problem, even if the task itself has a practical bias); - the originality (results that presented in the article should have a scientific novelty, survey articles to be approved by the special decision of The International Program Committee). The article must be clearly structured to be generally accepted in scientific publications sections, namely: - introduction; - relevance, scientific significance of the question with a brief review of the literature; -setting of the problem; - the theoretical part; - practical significance, suggestions and case studies, the results of experiments; - conclusions. The results that presented in this paper must be justified by particular scientific tools: experimental mathematical conclusion, mathematical modeling, etc., in order to be considered them as sufficiently reliable. We do not accept materials containing only a hypothesis or untested proposals. The presented results should be formulated in the form of scientific statements, which clearly define a contribution to science. The article should be written in an understandable language for an expert in the relevant field. Generally accepted technical terms should be used. The manuscripts should contain the following information: - paper title; - author(s) data (name, title, affiliation, full mail address, phone and fax numbers, e-mail address); - abstract; - keywords; - references. Contact person for queries: D B Solovev ([email protected])